Skip to comments.
Why Is ''Liberal'' a Negative Word?
Chron Watch ^
| 28 July 2004
| Lee Ellis
Posted on 07/28/2004 7:39:58 AM PDT by Lando Lincoln
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41 next last
To: Lando Lincoln
Why is "liberal" a negative word?
What planet has this doofus been on?
21
posted on
07/28/2004 8:21:24 AM PDT
by
Publius6961
(I don't do diplomacy either.)
Comment #22 Removed by Moderator
To: Publius6961
Liberalism, as defined today, is a negative word because it bases it's entire philosophy on negativism. It defines itself not so much as what it is for but what it is against.
Second, it's a mental disorder!
23
posted on
07/28/2004 8:29:33 AM PDT
by
Russ
To: Lando Lincoln
Why is this bad? If you don't try to take away the freedom of others and finance your agenda with the money of others, it wouldn't be so bad. Unfortunately, that's exactly what liberals do when they get elected.
To: Piquaboy
In 1945 a liberal was to the right of socialist. Today the liberal and socialist occupy the same slot. I dare say that today liberal politicians and their friends are getting rich off socialist government programs. Duh?
25
posted on
07/28/2004 8:42:11 AM PDT
by
oyez
(¡Qué viva la revolución de Reagan!)
To: Lando Lincoln
" I would like to know why ''liberal'' is a negative word."
Would you rather we call you socialist/marxist anti-American person? Alright then, you are a liberal.
To: gathersnomoss
IMO .... 2004 Liberal = Socialist edging on Communist = people who wish everyone to be equal execpt for themselves who wish to be more equal than the others
27
posted on
07/28/2004 9:00:57 AM PDT
by
clamper1797
(This Vietnam Vet ain't Fonda Kerry)
To: Lando Lincoln
The term 'Liberal' was once a good word to describe what the Conservative party and people really were. That word has been corrupted by the Democrat party is associated with communism and socialism which kills and destroys people and nations.
28
posted on
07/28/2004 9:04:42 AM PDT
by
Chewbacca
(Michael Moore is a filthy piece of distended rectum.)
To: clamper1797
Close enough. Call 'em as you see 'em. If we continue to call a LIBERAL a LIBERAL long enough, maybe there is a chance that we can educate those who want to learn and turn this left-facing nation around.
To: Piquaboy
"Why Is ''Liberal'' a Negative Word?"
If ya gotta ask ya haven't been paying attention.
30
posted on
07/28/2004 9:21:16 AM PDT
by
Warren
(Orhe)
To: Lando Lincoln
"Liberal" has become a dirty word for the same reasons that "diversity" has... because it's been consistently used as a euphemism for humanity-destroying socialism.
31
posted on
07/28/2004 9:25:58 AM PDT
by
thoughtomator
(End the imperialist moo slime colonization of the West!)
To: stylin19a
It seems "liberal" is a dirty word even to liberals.
They prefer to be called "progressives". I consider a "progressive" to be much worse than a "liberal". To me, a "progressive" is a flaming Communist.
32
posted on
07/28/2004 10:02:49 AM PDT
by
RJL
To: Lando Lincoln
6. Guaranteed health care
In the event that this comes to pass, I have a question. Will national health care guarantee everyone who needs it a transplant? Chemotherapy? Dialysis? (Please note that in the UK, people over 59 are NOT dialyzed.) Plastic surgeries? Where will the research $$ come from? Would this be dispensed in the fashion of public health clinics?
If 44 mm people in the US have no health care, I am assuming this is roughly 20%. What percentage of these folks are illegal? Would they be eligible, too?
Since the advent of the big HMOs, the transfer of wealth from physicians to the big companies has occurred. Is medicine better in this country because of it?
We have the best medical care in the world because we pay for it. If we have public health care, who will choose how the hearts/lungs/livers/kidneys/eyes are distributed? Who will get the preemie care par excellence? Who will get the newest treatments for rare diseases? Not everyone can benefit equally. It is logistically impossible.
To: stylin19a
They prefer to be called "progressives". Time to go to work on that word. "Gee, Mr. Lib, why do you call yourself progressive? Isn't that the description of an untreated cancer?"
34
posted on
07/28/2004 11:31:55 AM PDT
by
Denver Ditdat
(Ronald Reagan belongs to the ages now, but we preferred it when he belonged to us.)
To: anniegetyourgun
Actually, I think a premise of teh original point is wrong. When did we sacrifice hope? We as a people are among the most optimistic and forward looking people in the globe.
35
posted on
07/28/2004 11:35:23 AM PDT
by
HitmanLV
(I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.)
Comment #36 Removed by Moderator
To: anniegetyourgun
Reminds me of Churchill's comments re Chamberlain that he had faced a choice between War and Dishonor, had chosen Dishonor, and would get War.
37
posted on
07/28/2004 12:27:27 PM PDT
by
expatpat
To: Lando Lincoln
Generally people who do work hard to accomplish things lose their incentive to do so when those who do nothing get the same thing for free.BINGO!
38
posted on
07/28/2004 12:32:19 PM PDT
by
JoeSixPack1
(Freedom Stands Because Heroes Serve.)
To: stylin19a
progressive compared to what?
39
posted on
07/28/2004 1:08:12 PM PDT
by
NRA1995
To: Lando Lincoln
1. I would like to know why ''liberal'' is a negative word.It's a negative word to me because I've met and talked with liberals.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson